• since 1900 the American people act to nominate party candidates in primary elections
• this is in direct contrast to elsewhere b/c nominating party candidates is one of the most important sources of party control performed by party elites in other demo's
• thus, average American citizens hold power that only party elites have in other countries 

• Major American parties are composed of 3 interacting parts

1. Party Organization- party leaders and activists who work for party causes ans candidates
2. Party in Government- men and women who run for and hold public office on the party's label 
3. Party in the Electorate- citizens who express an attachment to the party  

• dominant theories on political participation stress that there are 3 big elements that lead to participating in politics at the individual level 

1. Resources- whether a person has the stuff necessary to participate 
2. Political Engagement- whether they have the motivation to participate
3. Mobilization- whether they have been asked to participate in the system 

1. Select candidates and contest elections
2. Educate citizens about issues important  to the party 
3. Work to influence government to provide certain policies  and benefits 

• parties help people make sense of the complexities of politics
• parties help aggregate and organize political power
• parties dominate the recruitment  of political leaders 
• parties help pull together a divided American political system 

• The Federalist Party (1788-1816)- championed strong central government 
• The Democratic-Republican or Jeffersonian Party (1800-1832)- opposed strong nat'l gov't  (believed in mass public more than the Federalists)
• The Democratic Party (1832-Present)- born from split in D/R  to form broad base and popular party (friend of less-privileged and new immigrants)
• The Whig Party (1834-1856)- born from another branch of D/R (unstable interest like nativism and business)
• The Republican Party (1854-Present)- formed to oppose slavery and stood for Union (picked up Whig's business interests) 

Occurs when there is greater agreement on policy stands within each party and sharper policy differences between the Democrats and Republicans

i.e. when the two parties become more united within and more differentiated between each other

ie. fall on more extreme ends of the spectrum

Incumberncy advantages for individuals in Congress are built upon:

• name recognition
• access to the media
• staff support
• campaign finance contributions
• incumbents as experienced campaigners 

1. Indivisibility of executives (means room for only 1 party at the top)
2. Laws favor major parties: 3rd parties have difficulties in ballot access and qualifying for public funding 
3. Anti-party culture makes it difficult to form true 3rd party organizations, so favors independent candidates 
4. greater ideological distance between major parties makes consequences of wasted vote more serious
5. chance of nomination via primary elections kee best candidates in dominant parties  

• 3rd parties are successful when they identify something that the American people want but that they major parties have left unaddressed
• the very success of a third party is a strong signal to the major parties that there are supporters avaliable to be attracted by adopting the tactics of the 3rd party
• then, a smart major party (or parties) will adopt this tactic, stealing the thunder of the 3rd party 
• non-political example Tivo- 3rd party DVR- popular previously unadressed need Time Warner

• b/c they are the foundation of a political party
• do this by being the keepers of the parties' brands- i.e. the unifying labels and ideas that give candidates a shortcut in identifying themselves to voters and that give voters a means to choose candidates 

- party strength is measured through organizational features known as party organizational strength.

- done mainly through a comparison of budgets an staff (where larger budgets and more staff mean stronger party organizational strength than the comparison set)

• manipulation of certain incentives to partisan political participation
• favoritism based on political criteria in personnel decisions, contracting, and administration of the laws 

• organization that practices machine politics
• i.e. attracts and directs its members primarily by means of these incentives 

• Service Party Path- SUPPORTING capaigns by building strong fund-raising operations that pay for needed services to their candidates and state parties, building local/state parties. First performed by Republicans, then Democrats 
• Procedural Reform Path- REGULATING presidential nomination process by strengthening national party's authority over the sate parties in the selection of a presidential nominee. First performed by Democrats then by Republicans 

1. Material Incentives- tangible rewards for activity, ie direct cash payments or other concrete rewards for one's work
2. Solidarity Incentives- intangible, social benefits that can accrue from associating with others and being a part of the group 
3. Purposive Incentives- intangible, referring to the sense of satisfaction people feel when promoting and issue or cause that matters to them

1. Professionals Activists- the party worker whose first loyalty is to the party itself and whose operating style is pragmatic 
2. Amateur Activists- the issue-based activists, motivated by purposive incentives, whose sees party activity as only one means of achieving important political goals 

• The Proportions- only about 8% of Americans have worked for a campaign, and only 5% have been involved in party organizations. Hershey notes that even with relatively small percentages, it amounts to over 6 million campaign and party activists
• Activists disproportionately come from political families (the power of socialization) 
• activists have a higher SES (education and income) than average Americans 

• Activists have different agendas than average Americans. 
• More likely to be motivated by education, abortion, the economy and human needs. 
• high income activists pay more attention to abortion and the environment while lower-income activists are more interested in basic human needs
• activists hold more extreme views (more polarized) on issues among themselves than average adults 

• data suggests that Democratic activists are more liberal than the average Democrat and Republican activists were already more conservative than average Republicans
• Republican activists are becoming more dedicated to conservative ideals since the early 1990s and have become even more conservative over time

No: Pro-extreme views- democrats as more liberal and Republicans as more conservatives helps distinguish the 2 parties from one another

i.e.- "responsible electorate"- voters can make informed choices when the parties are distinctive 

Yes: Extreme Views DO Hurt Democracy- polarized views from activists can alienate average Americans and make them more distrustful of politics 

• sense of psychological attachment that people develop towards a political party
• ie all about the sense of belonging psychologically to a particular party
• people literally see themselves as members of the party group

• Hershey argues that the dominant social science view of Party ID is that it can be understood as a form of social identity

Party ID- psychological identification with party- not measured as voter registration or actual vote choices 

• measured by American National Election Study (ANES), 7 point scale, survey conducted pre/post election birnnially since 1952, except in 2006 and 2010
• basic question- "generally speaking, so you think of yourself as a Rep or Dem, and independent or what?" Then asked if strongly attached to a party or leaning if independent, etc. 
• most Americans identify with a major party
• some call themselves independents, other are apolitical or 3rd party identifyers- grouped as non partisal below
• 7 point scale collapsed into 3 categories: Democrats, Republicans, Nonpartisans 

• Hershey argues that the other significant social science view of Party ID is that it can be understood as changeable (thus, less intense and constrained than a form of social identity)
• Party ID in this framework is a running total of positive or negative experiences with parties that can be updated and re-assessed over time
• thus, party ID is viewed mainly in this framework as a decision making shortcut (it reduces political complexity for those who use it) 

• the longer an individual holds a particular party ID, the more stable it normally becomes. 
• With experience, partisanship becomes a habit that is increasingly harder to break
• thus, Partisanship "hardens" with age and experience

Partisans vote loyally:

- very strong loyalty for president and House of Representatives elections

- candidate party is best information, especially for less visible races 

Partisans are more likely to:

- vote and decide their vote earlier

- be politically attentive, and active in political campaigns

- employ partisan motivated reasoning

           * thus, they have different evaluations (presidents,             .             economy), and use different facts (ie Obama's birthplace)

           * partisan children develop issue views through partisan . . .   .             filters (perceptual screen) 

• party identification is the most powerful predictor of vote preference, but American seems to have a really esteemed opinion for non-partisans or Independents
  
• but, the high opinion seems a little undeserved when you look at the data on Independents (defined here as individuals who don't feel attached to any political party)
• PRO: Independents split their ticker more ans wait longer to decide who to vote for 
• CON: Independents are less likely to participate and be politically involved (interested/knowledgeable/etc) than partisans 

• The types of people who support a party make up what is called the party's coalitions
• Party coalitions- the social, economic, or other groups most inclined to favor that party's candidates through good times and bad. 

- two terms seem to differ in terms of the degree of change they are describing

Party Realignment- Great and enduring changes in the parties' coalitions, usually (but not always) leading to a new majority party 

Party Dealignment- a significant decline in party loyalties 

• maintaining elections: elections where the presidential candidate for the majority party (party with the most identifiers in the mass public) normally wins 
• Deviating elections: elections in which short-term forces such as candidate characteristics or issues are powerful enough to cause the defeat of the majority party's candidate 

elections where the major party presidential candidate wins

ie. when election goes as expected and expected candidate wins

elections where unexpected forces cause expected candidate to lose

ie. not expected candidate wins

ususally caused by candidate characteristics or issues powerful enough to that the win from the major party's candidates (aka expected winner) 

The 6 Party System in U.S. History 

Parties over time as party systems defined by different electoral eras: 

1. Federalist v. Jeffersonians, 1801-1828
2. Democrats v. Whigs, 1829-1860
3. Democrats v. Republicans, 1861-1896
4. Democrats v. Republicans, 1897-1932
5. Democrats v. Republicans, 1933-1968
6. Democrats v. Republicans, 1969-present 

• there is a close relationship b/t the alignment of social groups with parties and the parties' stands on issues
• A group's presence in a party coalition indicates that many of the group's members have some shared reactions to major issues and candidates, which have drawn them to one party rather than the other
• therefore, you would expect that the party will be likely to express solidarity with the group's concerns and do other things to signal allegiance if the party aims to maintain the group's support 

Blacks

Latinos

Union households

Urban dwellers

Women 

Gays, Lesbians, and Bisexuals

Less than 50k/yr

Northeast region

Catholics

The young

The less religious 

Heavily White

Married People

Christians (especially Evangelical Protestants) 

The South 

The more religious 

Individual-level Differences in Voter Turnout

• There are various elements about a person's circumstances that matter in how they turnout to vote
• the more educated a person, the more likely they are to vote
• young people are less likely to vote than older people
• Latinos and Asians have been having lower turnout rates than Whites or Blacks
• People with a lot of social ties (belonging to groups or connected to friends and family) are much more likely to vote than others are

Education matters a lot in voter turn out

- this is because education does two main things

1. it helps inculcate civic norms 
2. it gives people resources (information, ability to deal with the system, etc) to vote

thus, the more education you have, the more likely you are to vote 

The impact of the current campaign matter in increasing voter turnout

- the excitement of the election can raise turnout

- voter turnout is highest for presidential elections and the lowest for local elections; this is because presidential elections are highly publicized 

- being highly publizised means citizens have an easier time learning about candidates and pay more attention to the information they see

- this lowers the cost of voting 

• one of the most important determinants of voter turnout level is the degree to which the party organizations, as well as campaigns and organized interests, mobilize to get out the vote on election day
• people go to the polls when somebody encourages them to do so; the most important thing is personal contact
• person-to-person contact tends to be more effective in increasing turnout than are mail or phone appeals 

What are the 5 Major Parties?

• The Federalists
• The Democratic-Republican or Jeffersonian Party
• The Democratic Party
• The Whig Party 
• The Republican Party 

1788-1816

championed strong central government 

 1800-1832

opposed strong national government 

-believed in mass public more than Federalists 

-split into The Democrat Party and The Whig Party

1832-present

born from split in D/R to form broad base and popular party

-friend of less-privileged and new immigrants

1834-1856

other branch born from D/R split

-unstable interests like nativism and business

1854-present

-formed to oppose slavery and stood for Union

-picked up Whigs business interests

• SUPPORTING campaigns by building strong fund-raising operations that pay for neede services to their candidates ams state parties
•